Nicholas Robert Rekieta / Rekieta "Law" / Actually Criminal / @NickRekieta - Polysubstance enthusiast, "Lawtuber" turned Dabbleverse streamer, swinger, "whitebread ass nigga", snuffs animals for fun, visits 🇯🇲 BBC resorts. Legally a cuckold who lost his license to practice law. Wife's bod worth $50. The normies even know.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

What would the outcome of the harassment restraining order be?

  • A WIN for the Toe against Patrick Melton.

    Votes: 56 24.0%
  • A WIN for the Toe against Nicholas Rekieta.

    Votes: 3 1.3%
  • A MAJOR WIN for the Toe, it's upheld against both of them.

    Votes: 75 32.2%
  • Huge L, felted, cooked etc, it gets thrown out.

    Votes: 28 12.0%
  • A win for the lawyers (and Kiwi Farms) because it gets postponed again.

    Votes: 71 30.5%

  • Total voters
    233
Really anything where he doesn't have to do any time is as good as it probably gets.
This is what I'm thinking. I imagine, and even postulated early on, that he would receive a deferred sentence, but with his antics and how long he's dragged this out, I now imagine the asshole tax is going from a deferred to suspended plea offer. In my humble opinion this would still be devastating to Nick's ego.
 
admitting guilt makes him feel like a vampire being dipped in a vat of molten silver
I don't know about Kandiyohi County, but I have seen court proceedings in other jurisdictions where simply saying "Guilty" is not enough. The judge will sit there and ask you questions about the crime, and if you're not actually accepting guilt, they won't take your plea.

For example (I was trying to find the video of this but couldn't), there was a case where a woman was caught on video shoplifting. She tried to plead guilty as part of a plea deal, but kept insisting that she only took the things by accident. The judge would not accept this. He said that if she was insisting it was an accident, then she needed to plead not guilty. She finally confessed after realizing that she was not going to walk out of there without actually admitting that she intentionally stole.

If Nick's jurisdiction works like this, he's going to have a HELL of a hard time accepting any kind of plea deal. I don't think he's physically capable of standing up and saying, "I plead guilty to the neglect of my children. I was not caring for them properly." He would try to do what that woman did and plead guilty for the sake of the plea agreement without actually admitting fault.
 
Psychologically and emotionally, any damage to the Rekieta children has already been done. The children would suffer greater harm being separated from their parents. The best outcome for them is that their parents stay together, in their same home, and life returns to their new normal ASAP. I do not wish that they now also have to go through the displacement of a divorce.

No matter how bad the parenting was in that home, it is what the Rekieta children are used to and it represents stability and security to them. Children love and are greatly attached to their parents despite their faults. And no one knows a parents faults better than their children. And children have a great capacity for forgiveness, even to their own detriment.
This is what I wish for their children.
This is what I wish for all children.
Signed,
Pollyanna Galoop
People express this type of sentiment all the time but I'm not sure I necessarily agree (although I understand the logic). Being in the Rekieta household gives them a certain baseline of constancy, I'll admit, but it also sets a very low upper limit for their performance in life as they'll emerge into adulthood as homeschooled iPad babies with enormous unresolved internal and familial conflicts (or worse: they'll see nothing wrong with their parents behaviour and emulate it). I'm not sure rolling the dice and putting them with relatives or the foster system is worse. At least there's a chance they'll break the cycle and become their own person.

I also don't think Nick is as safe a baseline as you might assume. He sees nothing wrong with associating with pedophiles (going as far as to superchat a pedophile details about his and Aaron's children) and has real "I'm one incident away from shooting myself and/or my family" energy. Nick from a few years ago was indistinguishable from any other neglectful parent of his generation. These days he's entering truly dark territory.
 
Last edited:
Would be kind of funny if tomorrow they revoke a plea deal and put new charges on him for his recent antics. Though has he done enough to cause the state to revoke a plea deal or are they required to give him one as a first offender?
 
1732571645337.png

Luckily for his children Nick only cares about the qualified opinions of upstanding people like the ethical-CP-enjoyer Patrick Melton who likes to suggest 15yo girls should start OF accounts.
 
I honestly don't think they're safe around Nick and that he's showing a lot of the behaviors typically associated with a family annihilator.
It's particularly concerning that he's also likely into meth now as well. I had suspicions he was doing it on and off as early as mid to late last year based off some of his ticks on stream, but now between the references to ice, the 'heat allergy', as well as his demeanor I'm like 90% sure he's been doing it.

Now I've seen that shit turn relatively well adjusted people into violent paranoid psychos so there's no telling what it'll do to someone like Nick who's already tapped te fuck, and has a history of killing small animals as well as threatening his wife with a weapon.
 
Last edited:
Would be kind of funny if tomorrow they revoke a plea deal and put new charges on him for his recent antics. Though has he done enough to cause the state to revoke a plea deal or are they required to give him one as a first offender?
It seems the local courts have had zero patience for Ralph the ragepig, so I'm cautiously optimistic they're taking a general hardline stance against sektor bullshit in general.
 
This is what I'm thinking. I imagine, and even postulated early on, that he would receive a deferred sentence, but with his antics and how long he's dragged this out, I now imagine the asshole tax is going from a deferred to suspended plea offer. In my humble opinion this would still be devastating to Nick's ego.
If he gets a deferred adjuciation offer and turns it down, he is the most colossal retard alive.

I would honestly be surprised if even Nick is that dumb.
Now I've seen that shit turn relatively well adjusted people into violent paranoid psychos so there's no telling what it'll do to someone like Nick who's already tapped te fuck and has a history of killing small animals and threatening his spouse with a weapon.
Cocaine and crack especially make already violent people more violent, but meth runs that last days can turn even normal people into hallucinating psychotics.
I don't think he's physically capable of standing up and saying, "I plead guilty to the neglect of my children. I was not caring for them properly."
He doesn't specifically have to say this since the facts that establish guilt are merely the presence of unsecured guns and drugs in the house, which presumptively constitute neglect/endangerment by itself. So he'd just have to admit to the presence of the kids in a house with the drugs and guns the cops found.
Nick from a few years ago was a passable parent. Today I'm not so sure.
He's probably been a shitty parent all along, just not on "CPS coming to take your kids away" levels of shitty.
 
Last edited:
As much as I personally want a trial so everybody stops treating the legal system with such utter disrespect, I'm certain there is some furious shower calls happening between Crackers and the prosecutor. If I was on the state's side, I'd demand Crackets admit there was no lying by Felt, Pomplin, et. al. He owes that much after spending six months pissing on their names.
 
I realize that this will go against the seemingly majority opinion here.

I hope that Nick and Kayla cop a plea, do no jail time, spend a certain amount of time on probation, being held responsible for maintaining a sober, clean home and that they retain full custody of all the children. If the Rekieta family stays in the same general location, the health and well-being of the children will remain under the watchful eye of extended family, friends, the community, and for a time, the State.

Psychologically and emotionally, any damage to the Rekieta children has already been done. The children would suffer greater harm being separated from their parents. The best outcome for them is that their parents stay together, in their same home, and life returns to their new normal ASAP. I do not wish that they now also have to go through the displacement of a divorce.

No matter how bad the parenting was in that home, it is what the Rekieta children are used to and it represents stability and security to them. Children love and are greatly attached to their parents despite their faults. And no one knows a parents faults better than their children. And children have a great capacity for forgiveness, even to their own detriment.
This is what I wish for their children.
This is what I wish for all children.
Signed,
Pollyanna Galoop

This is null and void if there is ever any proof of physical/sexual abuse of children. Only then should the state step in immediately and children be removed until their safety can be assured. I am comfortable with the Minnesota child welfare workers determination that the Rekieta children are in no further danger at this time. We may not like it, and I personally don't like Nick and Kayla one bit, but my need to see them punished is overshadowed by what is best for their children.

Hard disagree.

You know, most of us aim to live in a way that does not result in felonies. Most of us understand that committing felonies may very likely compromise and jeopardize our ability to make a living, our general reputation and status, and our ability to raise our children as they deserve to be raised - to say nothing of losing any claim to moral authority or anything like it. Most of us don't even want to commit felonies.

Committing crimes has consequences.

"Moral degeneracy" is fairly subjective, but committing bright-line felonies isn't.

The Rekietas committed felonies. If they were poor and Black, there would be no one here wishing and hoping and praying that they catch a break, cop a plea, and get left alone to decide on their own to do right by their kids.

There is no difference between Nick Rekieta shoveling mountains of illegal drugs up his nose, keeping a stash in the bedroom of a home with 5 minors in it, and keeping an unsecured gun where minors could access it, and some other random person doing it.

Their kids are no more special than the kids of some random family in inner-city Minneapolis. All the performative and shallow godliness in the world does not change the choices they made. And there is a very strong argument to make that their personal backgrounds of in-tact families, at least adequate family economic status, education, and incessantly broadcast church involvement - and especially the fact that Nick holds a law license - make them even more culpable than the average person.

They will probably catch an enormous break. But they don't deserve it.

I don't know about Kandiyohi County, but I have seen court proceedings in other jurisdictions where simply saying "Guilty" is not enough. The judge will sit there and ask you questions about the crime, and if you're not actually accepting guilt, they won't take your plea.

For example (I was trying to find the video of this but couldn't), there was a case where a woman was caught on video shoplifting. She tried to plead guilty as part of a plea deal, but kept insisting that she only took the things by accident. The judge would not accept this. He said that if she was insisting it was an accident, then she needed to plead not guilty. She finally confessed after realizing that she was not going to walk out of there without actually admitting that she intentionally stole.

If Nick's jurisdiction works like this, he's going to have a HELL of a hard time accepting any kind of plea deal. I don't think he's physically capable of standing up and saying, "I plead guilty to the neglect of my children. I was not caring for them properly." He would try to do what that woman did and plead guilty for the sake of the plea agreement without actually admitting fault.
It is inconsistent with the point of the judicial system for a non-guilty person to plead guilty. And liars and weasels about the ultimate question are generally unwelcome regardless of why they lie. There is a particular plea that permits you to claim innocence, but that is rare for a reason. In other cases, a judge is going to confirm that you freely and fully admit guilt before accepting a plea. I've seen a court outright refuse a non-negotiated guilty plea by an unrepresented person because the person should have been offered diversion (commission of the crime was undeniable). That's a different scenario due to the lack of counsel, but the point is that judges are guardians and caretakers of the system and its principles. They also don't want some random shite coming up later about how the person did not make a fully free and informed decision when adding a potentially life-altering conviction to their life.
 
It seems the local courts have had zero patience for Ralph the ragepig, so I'm cautiously optimistic they're taking a general hardline stance against sektor bullshit in general.
I think that what fucks Melton as well. They are sick of these assholes, not only that on Karls recent show Melton was basically telling the "pigs to come get him" yeah man they will take that real well.
 
The judge will sit there and ask you questions about the crime, and if you're not actually accepting guilt, they won't take your plea.

For example (I was trying to find the video of this but couldn't), there was a case where a woman was caught on video shoplifting. She tried to plead guilty as part of a plea deal, but kept insisting that she only took the things by accident. The judge would not accept this. He said that if she was insisting it was an accident, then she needed to plead not guilty. She finally confessed after realizing that she was not going to walk out of there without actually admitting that she intentionally stole.
I assumed this is normal across the board. A guilty plea isn't supposed to just be "save myself the trouble of a trial and get a reduced sentence" card. Baked alaska learned this the hard way when during his plea deal hearings he started protesting his innocence so the judge told him plea deal is off if he's seriously contending he's innocent.
 
If they were poor and Black, there would be no one here wishing and hoping and praying that they catch a break
Every first offender will catch a break on these kind of charges, unless they were also distributing the drugs.
No matter who it is, they would all get away with reduced charges, maybe have 1 or 2 even dismissed entirely and get probation + a fine.

There is no "wishful" thinking about any of that, Nick could have done that. It would have been easy. This is not a special case in any shape or for based on the circumstances and the charges alone. Only Nick is making it special with his very special behavior.

If Nick was not part of this fiasco April and Kaya would already be on the road of active recovery, likely without a felony conviction even after pleading down.

[EDIT] Cases like this number in the thousands in Minnesota alone. This is nothing special and a fairly typical case.
 
Archive
2024-11-25 - 23_33_17 - (2) Posts with replies by Rekieta Law (@RekietaLaw) _ X.png

Archive
2024-11-25 - 23_35_00 - (2) Posts with replies by Rekieta Law (@RekietaLaw) _ X.png

---
So as far as I understand Nick's choices:

Plea:
+ probably too good to reject (for a rational person)
+ less likely for bodycam to be released
- no right to appeal
- would have to admit guilt

Trial:
o outcome probably not much worse than plea
+ preserves right to appeal
+ won't have to admit guilt
- wastes more money
- more likely for bodycam to come out

Unless the bodycam is really bad or the plea deal somehow allows him to save face, I'd bet on trial. He doesn't care about wasting mom's money, he clearly likes to drag things out and take every long shot, and he won't have to admit to anything.
 
Last edited:
It is based on absolutely nothing and people should stop getting others' hopes up about it. While there is absolutely no doubt that the few excerpts of bodycam footage introduced in as exhibits in a trial would become public, and while there may even be a decent shot at petitioning some day for release of the bodycam excerpts that the Barneswalker uploaded to MNDES and presented as evidence in support of the Franks motion prior to a plea, in the event of a plea the pertinent statute is clear and unambiguous that any portion of an investigation's bodycam footage not presented as evidence in court remains private after the investigation flips from active status to inactive status, unless a specific exception applies, none of which will after the plea:
This. I was skeptical in June about getting bodycam but a loud chorus said it was imminent. I didn't see it in the statute.

In addition, it's his house. Any release that isn't used as evidence in a trial is going through a judge. It's Minnesota and I suspect that no judge is going to weigh the prurient interest of the public above the privacy interest of a homeowner. Homes enjoy great privileges of privacy. I can see a judge releasing bodycam outside the home but inside the home has a steep climb.
 
View attachment 6685953

Luckily for his children Nick only cares about the qualified opinions of upstanding people like the ethical-CP-enjoyer Patrick Melton who likes to suggest 15yo girls should start OF accounts.
Hey, that's not factually accurate! Actually he fantasized about 10yo girl starting Onlyfans in five years....oh
 
As much as I personally want a trial so everybody stops treating the legal system with such utter disrespect, I'm certain there is some furious shower calls happening between Crackers and the prosecutor. If I was on the state's side, I'd demand Crackets admit there was no lying by Felt, Pomplin, et. al. He owes that much after spending six months pissing on their names.
Nah. Prosecutor can't talk to him. If he tried, prosecutor would contact the Barneswalker and let them know about the attempted improper contact and ask them to tardwrangle their client.

One thing to consider when asking if Nick will plea out is that Nick would most likely not want to waive the ability to appeal.
That would be a non-starter if I was the prosecutor. Either plead guilty, waive appeal or go to trial. No way I'd accept a plea where I still have to spend the money/resources to fight an appeal. If Nick wants to appeal, he can pay for a trial and establish everything he wants to appeal.
 
Back